Re: luckgandor

(Anonymous) 2016-06-15 05:29 am (UTC)(link)
Didn't some of the people in the screencap/thread say that he hadn't actually refunded people yet? Or what that a link in one of the reblogs?

Re: luckgandor

(Anonymous) 2016-06-15 05:31 am (UTC)(link)
He has since refunded those people.

Re: luckgandor

(Anonymous) 2016-06-15 05:51 am (UTC)(link)
okay, how would you know that unless you're luckgandor

Re: luckgandor

(Anonymous) 2016-06-15 05:53 am (UTC)(link)
Alright, let me amend my statement: I have witnessed the people who commissioned him thank him for refunding them on his profile before he deleted those comments.

Is that enough for you, my aluminum-foil wearing friend?

Re: luckgandor

(Anonymous) 2016-06-15 05:59 am (UTC)(link)
DA
Not really, considering it took people publically calling him out in his threads to get his attention, months for those people to get their refunds at all, and he tried to open new threads to open commissions before those people even got refunded.

The scammer warning is well deserved and others have a right to be warned about whathe has done previously so they don't get ripped off by him.

Re: luckgandor

(Anonymous) 2016-06-15 06:01 am (UTC)(link)
Alright. If that's what you think is worthy of a scammer warning, then fair enough.

Re: luckgandor

(Anonymous) 2016-06-15 06:01 am (UTC)(link)
q: do you also think monarque deserves to be called a scammer

Re: luckgandor

(Anonymous) 2016-06-15 07:01 am (UTC)(link)
nayrt but why wouldn't she be called a scammer? multiple times now she's tried to run with people's money, and some claim she still hasn't refunded them

imo if it takes this many people causing this much fuss to get a refund, you're a scammer whether you eventually begrudgingly refund them or not

that goes for both of them

Re: luckgandor

(Anonymous) 2016-06-15 07:22 am (UTC)(link)
ayrt

yeah nonny that was my point

Re: luckgandor

(Anonymous) 2016-06-15 07:39 am (UTC)(link)
ah sorry, we get people stanning for monarque sometimes so you never know

Re: luckgandor

(Anonymous) 2016-06-15 07:39 am (UTC)(link)
no worries, that nonny didn't respond so i didn't get the chance to be a smart ass lol

Re: luckgandor

(Anonymous) 2016-06-15 06:01 pm (UTC)(link)
lol who hasn't she refunded yet? didn't her shop close 6 months ago

Re: luckgandor

(Anonymous) 2016-06-15 10:05 pm (UTC)(link)
DA

Some mysterious anon (*cough* Rhea *cough*) who keeps bitching about it to keep it alive. That is the only one I ever see complaining about not getting paid every few weeks - anyways on anon. Don't get me wrong, I like gucci as much as the next person (which isn't much), but considering there is proof Rhea has been stalking her for years now and there was a lot of false info when the whole ordeal started. I am inclined to believe the only person not paid is Rhea's hateboner.

Re: luckgandor

(Anonymous) 2016-06-15 10:13 pm (UTC)(link)
Care to drop said 'proof'? Also lmao, LOADS of people dislike gandor, not just rhea, I promise you.

DA

(Anonymous) 2016-06-16 12:31 am (UTC)(link)
monarque =/= gandor anon this is talking about a different person

Re: luckgandor

(Anonymous) 2016-06-16 01:52 am (UTC)(link)
Reading comprehension game is strong, I see...

gucci = monarque

Re: luckgandor

(Anonymous) 2016-06-16 12:14 am (UTC)(link)
exactly i would get it if there actually were people saying this but its one anon (hi rhea) every time? they dont even have proof to back it lmao

Re: luckgandor

(Anonymous) 2016-06-16 01:59 am (UTC)(link)
Tbh, I am sure it isn't Rhea all the time, but a few someone'\s trying to justify their dislike for her by saying "SEE LOOK! SHE IS A HORRIBLE PERSON! SHE HASN'T PAID ME BACK FROM THAT ONE INCIDENT! *foams at mouth*" I mean, if you really want your gems back, one would think that by now you would've tried to actually, Idk, talk to her? Or report it with actual proof?

The silly thing is, I think we can all agree that she handled that situation poorly and the ones who ordered from her do have a right to be mad, so to have that extra form of anger attached to it ends up hurting their case.